Bombay High Court
Narayan Raisingh Chavan (In Jail) vs D.I.G. Of Prison, Eastern Region, ... on 2 August, 2017
Bench: Prasanna B. Varale
1 WP565.2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Criminal Writ Petition No. 565/2017
Petitioner : Narayan Ramsingh Chavan,
C-4204 (detained in Central Prison,
Amravati)
Versus
Respondents : 1. D.I.G of Prison, Eastern Region,
Nagpur
2.Superintendent, Central Prison,
Nagpur
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Smt. Sneha S. Dhote, Advocate for the petitioner
Shri J.Y. Ghurde, A.P.P for the respondent/State
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CORAM : P.B.Varale and
M.G.Giratkar, JJ.
DATE : 02/08.201
.
Judgment : ( Per Murlidhar G. Giratkar, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the
consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
2. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the
impugned order passed on 03rd March, 2017 by the Respondent no. 1
rejecting the furlough application.
2 WP565.2017
3. It is submitted that the petitioner is convicted for the
offences punishable under sections 302, 450, 324, 504, 506 of the
Indian Penal Code. He is sentenced to suffer life imprisonment. The
petitioner has completed five years of imprisonment. The petitioner
applied for furlough leave for 20 days vide Application dated 12th
October, 2016. The said application is rejected on the ground of adverse
report submitted by the Respondent No. 2.
4. Respondent No. 1 also stated in the order that appeal is
pending against the judgment of conviction. Therefore, it is submitted
that the impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside.
5. Respondents have strongly opposed the petition. It is
submitted that as per the amended rules, furlough leave cannot be
granted because appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment of
conviction is pending.
6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Smt. Sneha S.
Dhote and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri J.Y. Ghurde.
7. From perusal of the report submitted by the respondent no.
2, it is clear that there is no serious objection. It is only stated that there
3 WP565.2017
will be breach of peace etc. that cannot be a ground to refuse the
furlough leave. Another ground raised in the order that appeal is
pending against the judgment of conviction. It is pertinent to note that
in the same situation, this Court has granted the furlough to other
prisoners. Hence, impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside.
Therefore, we allow the petition in terms of prayer clause (i) and (ii)
with direction to the respondents to release the petitioner on furlough
leave on usual terms and conditions.
8. Fees of appointed learned counsel Smt. Sneha S. Dhote is
quantified at Rs. 1500/-.
JUDGE JUDGE
A.P. Ansari
